Gamespy has a new article pitting the two games against one another. See here: http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/572/572447p1.html?fromint=1 I'm afraid I stopped taking it seriously when they gave WoW graphics the edge over EQII's. :smileymad:
I soooooo agree with the reviews statement above on the economy. I such a pain in the **** to set up a seller overnight only to get up in the morning and find you've been "disconnected" and nothing has sold....not to mention the fact you don't know if your disconnect was 5 minutes after you walked away or 5 hours.
Currently WoW is hands down more beautifull than eq2 with a geforce 6800gt card.... Untill sony fixes the bad framerates and stutter issues, i would also put WoW is way way ahead. And before someone starts complaining about it being a bug, and not counting.. Helloo, it's been like this for a good while (since the beta) and.. If they can't code with the new shader features, don't give them credit for using it.
Well I have to say.. good review overall... but I have to say that the person doing it had a bit of Bias (seeing as how he purchased WoW and is actively playing it). So all in all.. I dont think it was the "best" it could have been. then again there is always bias in most reviews. Just makes it easy to see "why" the person writing the review chooses a stance in each scenario.
Since I have not played wow I was interested in the quest system. This is not mentioned in the article. Is it comparable to what EQ2 is or better. The rare drop quest in EQ2 are what I like the best. It lets everyone be different by their experince in the game.
The game is not meant to run on "Extreme Quality" yet. They said the technology is not even on the market yet to run EQ2 at it's highest setting. They are thinking ahead to the future. Don't blame SOE for not being able to run smoothly at the highest setting with a $400 video card that's been out a while. I assume that's what you meant, if not my appologies. I DO think WoW did a great job making a great looking game with minimal system requirements. EQ looks better, you just have to have the PC muscle to push it. Most importantly though is the fun factor. I played WoW beta for about 2 weeks before I got bored. Over a month into EQ2 now and I'm still as hooked as day one. Sure there are a ton of things I'd like to see in EQ2 to make it better (Selling goods offline, better banking interface, mail system for both messages and packages) but overall they's got my vote hands down. Edit: Because I mixed up "Extreme Performance" with "Extreme Quality"...I run smoothly at "Extreme Performance" on a 3 year old video card that wasn't even top of the market when I got it. I can't imagine a 6800gt runs worse. There has to be more variables. Message Edited by Tryon on 12-15-2004 12:10 PM
I beta tested both of these games. I also have to disagree with his statements about the graphics. Yes, WoW graphics are "retro" and fun, but hands down they go to EQ2. Look at the two pictures they had posted in the article. LMFAO That proves that EQ2 graphics are much better. One of the BEST features of WoW was the auction house! It was VERY sweet to either put your item up or make a bid on something, camp for the night, sleep (OMG...did he say the "S" word?), log back on the next day and see your item sold or see if you were successful in bidding on an item. You didnt have to be logged on all night to make all that work. You would log into the game and your mail icon would be flashing. The bad thing about this is you can not read your mail anywhere. You had to be in a major city. That was a minor flaw though. Your mail message would tell you what you have sold and if your bid for an item was successful or not. The quest system on WoW was nice. When you were in a general area of the NPC that gave it to you or an NPC that you needed to talk to, a yellow dot would show up on your radar showing you where you had to go. This was clearly an advantage WoW had over EQ2. Although, the quest system as-a-whole, favors EQ2. Hopefully this article will open the eyes of the devs here. Maybe they will start implementing some new systems into EQ2 to make it better. Of course, we all know they wont :smileyindifferent:
>The game is not meant to run on "Extreme Performance" yet. Are you kidding me, it's the LOWEST SETTING AVAILABLE > They said the technology is not even on the market yet to run EQ2 at it's highest setting. It runs like hell on my intel 3ghz 1gb dual channel cas 2 performance ram (it uses about 600) geforce 6800gt intel performance motherboard raid harddrives freshly installed And no, it's not just my box, search for 6800 on theese forums. (Hint, that's the biggest card you can buy for money, running the lowest settings available in the game) The way i see it, the game has potential, but right now, i would take decent performance (25+ fps) and quake1 graphics over nice screenshots, but framerates so slow you can count em (10-15ish). Btw, it must feel great to be the one-star-ninja... Message Edited by Orki who Posts on 12-14-2004 12:56 AM
I feel yer pain on the graphics deal i spend 5k on a machine top of the line for the money amd fx53, sk8 asus, 2 gig kingston ram, (SoE approved or whatever) 6800 ultra, Sound Blaster audigy plat pro......the list goes on from there it runs like Crud.....I bought the machine so i would not have the problems i do. I know it's not my computer or connection....i have a surfboard modem if that tells ya anything .........i'm trying to be patient but it's starting to grate on my nerves now.
WoW wins graphics because the reviewer 'doesn't care for the look of EQ2'? You can't write reviews like this and have people take you seriously...
i am running a 2.6ghz p4 with 1gb ram and a radeon 9800 pro and it runs beautifully on high QUALITY for me. smooth movements, not choppy at all only time it does slow down abit is when everyone in the group is chain casting everyspell in the book and then it is still not bad at all
Same for me. I only have a 2Ghz system with 1GB ram and an old Gforce ti 4600 (still a great card) and I run just fine at normal settings. It must be something wrong with the drivers for your card.
Cirga wrote: "Well I have to say.. good review overall... but I have to say that the person doing it had a bit of Bias (seeing as how he purchased WoW and is actively playing it). So all in all.. I dont think it was the "best" it could have been. then again there is always bias in most reviews. Just makes it easy to see "why" the person writing the review chooses a stance in each scenario". I completely agree with you man! I had the sensation the writer had a bit of Bias since the first page of the article. It's an ok article but on some points it's really silly. How can u compare a PvE game like EQ2 with a PvP one??? That does not make sense. Of course WoW is getting the edge there! Very silly indeed. It shouldn't be there at all. SOE people always said that the game will be PvE based. In the future it may change to PvP but only at that time the comparison will be meaningful. And regarding that guy blaming the graphics...BUY A NEW PC! The game runs smoothly with a mere AMD 2200+ (1.8GHz!!! not even the latest 64bit or HT technologies!), 1GB DDR memory (266MHz not 400!!!), and a fantastic old generation ATI 9800PRO 256 DDR2...I can easily set the game to Balanced (and you are talking about low setting???). No stuttering, no lag, nothing wrong. The game shines and the graphics are impressing. And you know what? To run the game at high quality I probably need a simple addition like a motherboard with FSB800 so I will be able to run DDR400 and a better processor (less than 200$ dollars may be??? Well, for me it would be in English sterling )...it is as simple as it gets. Yes, DO buy another PC.
EQ2 bazaar system is just bad, nothing learned from EQ1 at all. WoW and FFXI i.e. are miles ahead on this one. SOE's reasoning for this kind of system is just as stupid as Blizzards localized server idea in a MMO. Hopefully Vanguard shows both how it has to be done.
The poll was very bias towards WoW due to the area's he was comparing the game on. What about comparions like... Class variety. Lastability (in terms of keeping the player interested through advancement, quests, and high-level content). Sound/Music. You don't rate a game based on a comparison between something as trivial as the auction system - it looked like the guy was just trying to find things for WoW to beat EQ with.
I am not sure why people are so threatened by commentary regarding the graphics or immediately claim bias when someone prefers WOW in general or its graphics in particular. I played WOW in beta and had planned on playing it. I decided on a lark to buy EQ2. The lags at the end of open beta worried me (apparently for good reason), and I decided to try EQ2 in the interim to give it a chance as well. I found the game differences to be very telling. EQ2's graphics obviously will stand the test of performance time and are designed to last through hardware advances. They are technically brilliant, particularly on the micro level of detailing. I would also say there is a dimension of realism that I find appealling. For example, BB looks and feels like a gnoll's lair. Some areas are just graphically annoying to me -- I really cannot stand the caves. Yes it is a cave. Yes it is dark like a cave. No, I do not enjoy anytime I have to visit that area. Despite the "realism" appeal, I have to admit I have found little in this game to really appeal to me artistically in the graphics. They are incredibly detailed, each zone has a unique feel, but I have had no moment where I grabbed my wife and said WOW! look at this, this is beautiful! For all that WOW has a cartoon feel, I can say those cartoons had artistic consistency and fantastic overall direction. When I played Night Elf and went into the bigger cities, I was like holy cow, this is incredible looking. At this point, I have decided to stick with EQ2. I generally would prefer a game that is less emphasized on grouping and at least a bit more solo catered. I found, however, that there was more detail to game play, more strategy in the fights, more overall complexity, more complexity to crafting (despite its current flaws). Level progression seemed slower. It seemed like it took a bit more digging, a bit more thinking, and a bit more time to figure everything out and was thus more challenging. All these things added up to a game with a longer term appeal as I think I would have maxed out quickly in WOW and run out of things to do. Overall, the graphics question to me is really one of artistic appeal and I do not see why EQ2 fans seems so offended when a person prefers the graphical feel (and less intense hardware requirements and loading issues to boot) of WOW. That really is not the crux of what I see as the advantages EQ2 has that appeal to me more than WOW over the long haul.
Salimon wrote: "i am running a 2.6ghz p4 with 1gb ram and a radeon 9800 pro and it runs beautifully on high QUALITY for me. smooth movements, not choppy at all only time it does slow down abit is when everyone in the group is chain casting everyspell in the book and then it is still not bad at all". Well, it looks like ATI has got the edge here. As I said in a previous post, my 9800PRO runs smoothly and it's older than an NVIDIA 6800 Ultra, so I would not blame EQ2 or SOE but NVIDIA... In fact it actually matches his statement. He can run at High Quality while mine with Balanced settings because of the more powerful processor he's got on board. Thanks God that day I went for ATI
